Luis Robert - How much should the Reds offer?

[REDREAD]

Not sure it makes sense to sign him for 30-40 million (including penalties).
I know the Reds are limited in the future signing of international players. I know they are capped in draft spending.. So I see the logic of going big.

However, if you assume there is 40 million in the bank to spend on adding talent, it might make sense to spend it elsewhere (like locking up current young players).

This kid would have to play pretty well to justify that amount of bonus. If I understand the rules correctly, he is too young to be given a MLB contract like Chapman was. (Please correct me if I am wrong).. So 40 million means he basically costs an about an extra 7 million per year during his six years of control. That is pretty steep for a prospect, even one that can not miss supposedly. The whole point of hording young talent is that it is more cost effective.

Now if it is 40 million for his entire first six years (kind of like Chapman), then that is different, but still a pretty big financial risk

[Kc61]

Not sure it makes sense to sign him for 30-40 million (including penalties).
I know the Reds are limited in the future signing of international players. I know they are capped in draft spending.. So I see the logic of going big.

However, if you assume there is 40 million in the bank to spend on adding talent, it might make sense to spend it elsewhere (like locking up current young players).

This kid would have to play pretty well to justify that amount of bonus. If I understand the rules correctly, he is too young to be given a MLB contract like Chapman was. (Please correct me if I am wrong).. So 40 million means he basically costs an about an extra 7 million per year during his six years of control. That is pretty steep for a prospect, even one that can not miss supposedly. The whole point of hording young talent is that it is more cost effective.

Now if it is 40 million for his entire first six years (kind of like Chapman), then that is different, but still a pretty big financial risk

I wouldn't spend beyond top MLB price levels for a great prospect. There is a limit. I certainly wouldn't jeopardize the team's ability to function for one signing.

But now is the time for big prospect additions. At some point the Reds won't be drafting this high; their Int'l signings next two years are limited; top major MLB free agents are not in the budget.

Now is the time when the priority must be adding more top prospects.

A player such as this is cost effective when compared to MLB free agents. The Reds can't top off their team with a $155 million Jon Lester signing like the Cubs did. Guys like Luis Robert are the Reds' big moves instead.

The Reds have to decide if their goal is to be a solid team, good for a small market, or if they aspire to the highest level of MLB competition. If the latter, Reds need to take the occasional risk for true top talent.

[Benihana]

Certainly not as much as they paid to AlfRod. AlfRod clearly seems like a better prospect.




My serious answer is they should pay him whatever it takes. If they're prevented from spending big money on international talent the next two years, and their draft pools are capped anyway, there is no excuse not to go huge on a guy like this.

[SYCMiniBus]

Certainly not as much as they paid to AlfRod. AlfRod clearly seems like a better prospect.




My serious answer is they should pay him whatever it takes. If they're prevented from spending big money on international talent the next two years, and their draft pools are capped anyway, there is no excuse not to go huge on a guy like this.

This is where it gets tricky. Say the price turns into 13 million, which for the Reds means 26 million because of penalties. That might mean the Reds lose say 10-15 million dollars this year. It is a lot easier to say that when it isn't your money.

Now obviously I have no way to know if that number would be accurate. Hell for all I know the Reds make 100 million dollars per year (though I doubt that highly), but asking them to "go huge" and in the process take a big financial hit in one year is much easier to do when it isn't your money.

[M2]

The answer to the question is the Reds should offer more than anyone else if they want to sign this kid, because he'll be going to the team that pays him the most money. Sounds like that's going to be in the $30-$40M range once you factor in penalties.

This is where I note the MLB rules that supposedly protect small market teams actually dish out penalties and create restrictions that make it nearly impossible for small markets to go after a player like Robert.

[dougdirt]

This is where I note the MLB rules that supposedly protect small market teams actually dish out penalties and create restrictions that make it nearly impossible for small markets to go after a player like Robert.

Well, that all changes July 2nd.

[Kc61]

Well, that all changes July 2nd.

Not sure that it changes all that much. Smaller market teams will have either a half million or 1 million $ more to spend on Int'l guys, the applicable amount dependent on their Competitive Balance pool.

But the current penalties already incurred still apply and the cap still restricts teams for spending large amounts on free agents.

I understand the CBA is a give and take. Every rule can't cater to the smaller markets. But it would seem that if a smaller market can get an Int'l guy by spending more -- to compensate for their inability to compete in the MLB FA market -- that should be encouraged.

The new system doesn't encourage smaller markets to open their modest piggy banks for Int'l players.

[SYCMiniBus]

Not sure that it changes all that much. Smaller market teams will have either a half million or 1 million $ more to spend on Int'l guys, the applicable amount dependent on their Competitive Balance pool.

But the penalties still apply, and are severe. Trade rights help, but the penalties are still tough.

I understand the CBA is a give and take. Every rule can't cater to the smaller markets. But it would seem that if a smaller market can get an Int'l guy by spending more -- to compensate for their inability to compete in the MLB FA market -- that should be encouraged.

The penalties do not encourage smaller markets to open their modest piggy banks for Int'l players.

It is a hard cap after July 2, no penalties like you are speaking of

[Kc61]

It is a hard cap after July 2, no penalties like you are speaking of

Upon review, you're correct, thanks for the correction. But the currently existing penalties apply for two years and the hard cap is restrictive.

Just seems to me that smaller markets should be given the freedom to spend on Int'l free agents because they often can't afford to compete for the top MLB free agents.

[dougdirt]

It's a hard cap after July 2 - with penalties if a team exceeds its cap.

You can't exceed your cap. You get $4.75, $5.25 or $5.75M depending on a few variables. You can also trade for cap space up to 75% of what you originally were allowed. That's it. You can not go over that number. There aren't penalties available because you won't get deals approved by Major League Baseball.

[SYCMiniBus]

Upon review, you're correct, thanks for the correction. But the currently existing penalties apply for two years and the hard cap is restrictive.

Just seems to me that smaller markets should be given the freedom to spend on Int'l free agents because they often can't afford to compete for the top MLB free agents.

Well if you want no penalties then the big markets still have the edge because they have more money to spend on this sort of thing. Look what the Bo Sox, Yankees, and Cubs have done in the international market

[M2]

You can't exceed your cap. You get $4.75, $5.25 or $5.75M depending on a few variables. You can also trade for cap space up to 75% of what you originally were allowed. That's it. You can not go over that number. There aren't penalties available because you won't get deals approved by Major League Baseball.

It's going to be interesting to see how that shakes out. Might involve major league contracts. Agents might structure deals that spit a premium into free agency by age 23.

[Benihana]

Point is, the Reds don't really have ANYTHING beyond their draft cap to spend money on to acquire and/or retain significant talent for the next 2 years. Other than maybe DeSclafini, there aren't any young players that they'll need to lockup in the next 12 months, even pre-emptively- and that's especially true as far as hitters go. Pitchers like Finnegan, Reed and Garrett I'd want to see more than one season of strong performance before I'd consider giving out a long-term deal with multiple options. Hitters like Senzel and Winker aren't even sure if they'll see significant major league at-bats in 2017 let alone be candidates to lock-up long-term. They're banned from signing real international talent for the next two years. They've cleared every real long-term contract from the books with the exception of Votto and Bailey.

So why not blow the load and shell out $15-20M to a rare talented bat like this? It's the right profile, right position, right age, right everything. It's EXACTLY what they need to do. Of course that means that they won't.

I've been as outspoken of a critic of Williams and the Reds rebuild as anyone, but I'd give him a 3 year pass if he made this happen. Unfortunately I'm not holding my breath.

[dougdirt]

It's going to be interesting to see how that shakes out. Might involve major league contracts. Agents might structure deals that spit a premium into free agency by age 23.

I'd imagine that's a loophole that's closed. The reason I say that is because, well, why wouldn't teams already be doing it if it were allowed, instead of paying all of these penalties?

[M2]

I'd imagine that's a loophole that's closed. The reason I say that is because, well, why wouldn't teams already be doing it if it were allowed, instead of paying all of these penalties?

They aren't doing it now because they'd run the risk of losing the kid at a young age. The current system gives them a lot more control. Yet if you can't spend on a kid up front, then (if you're a big market) how can you lure in a kid with the potential to make big bucks much sooner? As far as I'm aware, there's no prohibition to handing out major league contracts to draftees or international signings. Teams generally don't do it because it's high risk, but a Luis Robert or Kevin Maitan might be worth it.